Well, I think that there is a sign of a broken (or at least bent) process and that's what I'm trying to expose. Especially given the ongoing conversations over Gantt it seems wrong that ultimately it was rejected due to silence. Maybe rejecting the BP was the right decision but the way the decision was made was just wrong.
Note that dealing with silence is `really` difficult. You point out that maybe silence means people don't agree with the BP but how do I know? Maybe it means no one has time, maybe no one has an opinion, maybe it got lost in the shuffle, maybe I'm being too obnoxious - who knows. A simple -1 with a one sentence explanation would helped a lot. -- Don Dugger "Censeo Toto nos in Kansa esse decisse." - D. Gale Ph: 303/443-3786 -----Original Message----- From: Jay Pipes [mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, August 29, 2014 10:43 AM To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Is the BP approval process broken? On 08/29/2014 12:25 PM, Zane Bitter wrote: > On 28/08/14 17:02, Jay Pipes wrote: >> I understand your frustration about the silence, but the silence from >> core team members may actually be a loud statement about where their >> priorities are. > > I don't know enough about the Nova review situation to say if the > process is broken or not. But I can say that if passive-aggressively > ignoring people is considered a primary communication channel, > something is definitely broken. Nobody is ignoring anyone. There have ongoing conversations about the scheduler and Gantt, and those conversations haven't resulted in all the decisions that Don would like. That is unfortunate, but it's not a sign of a broken process. -jay _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStackemail@example.com http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStackfirstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev